R N GATTANI Vs. ASHOK ZAVERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge the concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below under the Bombay Rent Act holding that the respondent-landlady had established her bonafide need of the suit premises.

(2.) SHRI Dhakephalkar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners urged before me that the only need that was pleaded by the landlady was that her husband wanted to come back to India from New York where he wanted to marry his son and daughter. Shri Dhakephalkar submitted that now the landlady has led the evidence that she was suffering from Asthma and that climate of New York was not suitable. In the submission of the learned counsel this evidence is without any pleadings. In the submission of Shri Dhakhephalkar therefore, the evidence could not have been accepted by the Courts below. It is further submitted that the petitioner had examined a Doctor who is an expert in respiratory disease who had stated that climate of New York is better for Asthma and that climate of Bombay is worst for a patient suffering from Asthma. The learned counsel further submitted that considering that it was merely landlady who wanted to come to Bombay, the Courts below ought to have considered whether a decree of partial partition of suit premises would subserve the interest of justice.

(3.) IN the circumstances, therefore, in my opinion, this is not a fit case where this Court should interfere with the concurrent findings recorded by the two Courts. Petition is therefore, rejected.